Re: [ECOS] Replacing CVS - decision time: part 2

[Jonathan Larmour <jifl at jifvik dot org>]

On 28/04/10 20:57, Alex Schuilenburg wrote:
> On 2010-04-28 20:26, BjÃrn Forsman wrote:
>> [,,,]
>> Git may be worse than hg on Windows, but IMHO git has better branching
>> and tagging.
>>   
> Could you please explain why you think git has better branching and tagging?

NB I did specifically cover branching in both hg and git in my first pass
of analysis
(<http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss/2010-03/msg00044.html>), so
perhaps Bjorn could reply in that context. It seemed to me that mercurial
had more choices of branch methodology than git, specifically a superset
of git's. But there were a few paradigm differences - notions of tracking
branches for example (although you can achieve the same thing in hg, it's
not defined as formally).

Just as a reminder, I found this guide to be useful:
http://stevelosh.com/blog/2009/08/a-guide-to-branching-in-mercurial/
It specifically includes comparisons between hg and git.

Jifl

-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss